The
panel vacated a magistrate judge's dismissal of an action
brought by a civil detainee pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
and remanded for further proceedings.

After
plaintiff consented to have his case decided by a magistrate
judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), the magistrate
judge dismissed plaintiff's complaint prior to service of
process for failure to state a claim. The panel held that 28
U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) requires the consent of all
plaintiffs and defendants named in the complaint-
irrespective of service of process-before jurisdiction may
vest in a magistrate judge to hear and decide a civil case
that a district court would otherwise hear. Because consent
was not obtained from the defendants in this case, the
magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to dismiss the
complaint. The panel therefore vacated the dismissal and
remanded.

OPINION

N.R.
SMITH, CIRCUIT JUDGE.

28
U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) requires the consent of all
plaintiffs and defendants named in the complaint-irrespective
of service of process-before jurisdiction may vest in a
magistrate judge to hear and decide a civil case that a
district court would otherwise hear. Because consent was not
obtained from the defendants in this case, we vacate the
magistrate judge's dismissal and remand.

I

Under
California's Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA),
inmates, approaching the end of their sentence or nearing
eligibility for supervised release, may be referred for
evaluation to determine if they pose a continuing risk of
committing sexually violent offenses. Cal. Welf. & Inst.
Code § 6601(a). If, after these evaluations, it is
determined that the individual is a sexually violent
predator, the government may request a probable cause hearing
to establish a basis for tolling parole eligibility or
release until the resolution of a jury trial to prove that
the individual is a sexually violent predator. See
id. § 6601(h)-(j); id. § 6601.5;
id. § 6603.

Williams
was convicted of three counts of rape in 1991. As he neared
the completion of his sentence, Williams was evaluated and
identified as a potential sexually violent predator. In
December 2000, the San Francisco District Attorney's
office initiated a probable cause hearing to establish that
Williams was a sexually violent predator. At the December 21,
2000 hearing, the judge found probable cause to believe
Williams was a sexually violent predator. Since this initial
determination, Williams has raised challenges to his
continued confinement, including seeking to set aside the
probable cause determinations and filing successive habeas
petitions in California state court. Though temporarily
successful in setting aside initial probable cause
determinations, subsequent evaluations and probable cause
...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.